Hello!
Congratulations, but:
At least 12 hours the links for downloading the wallet from obyte.org do not work!
Authorization Required Error
Thanks for letting know, just fixed. |
|
|
|
Thanks for keeping an eye on it! Addresses referred by wgf90cxkyv are now removed from the draw. Please let us know if you find any other signs of fraudulent activity.
OK! Please answer two questions: 1. I am an STEEM referrer and I am interested in: are you going to reward users who have registered after July 12? Half a year has passed since the launch of the bridge and many people were registered after this date, and gain the necessary reputation now. These users will not be rewarded anyway and their refer too.  2. Can I use BYTES frozen in a smart contract with steem attestation bot or real name attestation bot in Weekly Draw? Is it technically possible and are you going to add such support? Thank you very much for your reply, with interest in your product. 1. Not yet, there are still high chances of fraud and new accounts pose the most risk. Anyway the min rep that qualifies for reward is now 55 and it is very unlikely to organically achieve such rep within 6 months. 2. Unfortunately you can't. The contract address can't sign a message before it vests. |
|
|
|
Hello!
I have a supposition that some refers are abusing Weekly Draw!
There are refers who invite only attested users and this users immediately deposits exactly 10 GB. (Strange? They at least need to check.)
Detailed example of suspicious activity:
refer: wgf90cxkyv
total points: ~120
SIAYZE2S5XYEQVKMELGCB6VPWTYQLZPV 11,14164851 GB 10,11416485 points attested
5HYF4SU3RE77AF2O3GRFKRYECLUIRWCQ 10,24234144 GB 10,02423414 points attested
VYODIKMHCJ23ME64AHT7ONFO7WDNQANG 10,04170996 GB 10,004171 points attested
YXNQJWRRYYIBVDKUJ7TPZZBUJS5NBMXD 10,04016838 GB 10,00401684 points attested
LBQY6G32RJLX3LBTT6BIZCJSCAMIQKGV 10,03219945 GB 10,00321994 points attested
DF2MEN5W5AGPSJBH5VD7IP2STRQ5QQQC 10,03128896 GB 10,0031289 points attested
UJCHIFDYHWGYZ5XTJC5WCODELO5D4XMW 10,03075751 GB 10,00307575 points attested
HPPBG7SF6AKJ23QHYW34NSFSRVYFICU7 10,03034243 GB 10,00303424 points attested
K4SJX3MD4KDZFQAQWPAKQJQCEQ2BARXX 9,993271883 GB 9,993271883 points attested
AJM3H7SQ6FL257OKSSQY6552DVYXXGGG 9,952617925 GB 9,952617925 points attested
VMA6KDBSTVO4X5Q5R2ZHPU752WLEXSZL 9,936239608 GB 9,936239608 points attested
DO357MNXND52NDOMTQ7C5WQEFX6PAMMG 9,493648553 GB 9,493648553 points attested
MBMYKHMGVRTYADKYEUXPLC7U5RF3FWTG 0,331288957 GB 0,331288957 points attested
MZGV3CBSTRNQAV2EVQUKAHOVQADDKCZO 0,244172757 GB 0,244172757 points attested
CZBHTUGC2FYQMPDUHWOHKB6DP7AMQUTM 0 GB 0 points attested
Also need to check: z2rjatm4w4, t8y0q0cjbe, rh8to5u9jm, o9t64ovhy5
Surface analysis revealed suspicious activity: ~300 points (>more than 10% chance to win)
I apologize if I hurt the feelings of real referrals. Such activity seems suspicious. It needs to be checked.
If this makes sense, I can conduct an in-depth analysis of suspicious activity, find a pattern between transfers to find more potential abuse.
Thanks for keeping an eye on it! Addresses referred by wgf90cxkyv are now removed from the draw. Please let us know if you find any other signs of fraudulent activity. |
|
|
|
New rules for the next draw scheduled for Friday Dec 28: 1. Steem attestations with reputation over 60 are now also accepted along with real name attestations. There are only about 3000 Steem users with such high reputation, and many of them have a significant social following. The idea is that it'll help to build referral networks, attract smaller holders, and dilute the whales. 2. The draw has been criticized by both whales who think they are punished with the points system, and by smaller holders who see a large share of points still going to whales. Now the draw is split in two: - one is based on balances, just balances, no points. The winner will be named Prince of Whales. - the other is based on points as before, with rules further adjusted in favor of smaller holders (see below). The winner will be named King of Goldfish ( suggestions about a better name are welcome). The prize fund is split in two: 100 GB for the Prince of Whales and 100 GB for the King of of Goldfish but each participant automatically participates in both draws and can win in each of them (even in both at the same time). Now there can be two referrers, one for the Prince of Whales and one for the King of Goldfish, each receives 100 GB and 211.11 GBB. 3. The new rules for calculating points with the second threshold lowered from 1000 GB to 100 GB: * Real-name attested addresses get 1 point per GB of balance up to 10 GB, plus 0.1 point for each GB between 10 GB and 100 GB, plus 0.01 point for each GB above 100 GB. * Unattested addresses get 0.01 point per GB of balance. * 0.1 point is awarded for each GB of balance increase over the maximum balance in the previous draws, up to a 2x increase. * 0.2 point is deducted for each GB of balance decrease since the previous draw. The rules for the next draw are the same. |
|
|
|
1. Steem attestations with reputation over 60 are now also accepted along with real name attestations. There are only about 3000 Steem users with such high reputation, and many of them have a significant social following. The idea is that it'll help to build referral networks, attract smaller holders, and dilute the whales.
What about the idea of finally creating a benefit? Yes the draw is not the most serious one. We are working on a number of other ideas in parallel, they will be announced when ready. |
|
|
|
New rules for the next draw scheduled for Friday Dec 28: 1. Steem attestations with reputation over 60 are now also accepted along with real name attestations. There are only about 3000 Steem users with such high reputation, and many of them have a significant social following. The idea is that it'll help to build referral networks, attract smaller holders, and dilute the whales. 2. The draw has been criticized by both whales who think they are punished with the points system, and by smaller holders who see a large share of points still going to whales. Now the draw is split in two: - one is based on balances, just balances, no points. The winner will be named Prince of Whales. - the other is based on points as before, with rules further adjusted in favor of smaller holders (see below). The winner will be named King of Goldfish ( suggestions about a better name are welcome). The prize fund is split in two: 100 GB for the Prince of Whales and 100 GB for the King of of Goldfish but each participant automatically participates in both draws and can win in each of them (even in both at the same time). Now there can be two referrers, one for the Prince of Whales and one for the King of Goldfish, each receives 100 GB and 211.11 GBB. 3. The new rules for calculating points with the second threshold lowered from 1000 GB to 100 GB: * Real-name attested addresses get 1 point per GB of balance up to 10 GB, plus 0.1 point for each GB between 10 GB and 100 GB, plus 0.01 point for each GB above 100 GB. * Unattested addresses get 0.01 point per GB of balance. * 0.1 point is awarded for each GB of balance increase over the maximum balance in the previous draws, up to a 2x increase. * 0.2 point is deducted for each GB of balance decrease since the previous draw. |
|
|
|
The rules for the next draw (@bittybox you were first to notice): * Real-name attested addresses get 1 point per GB of balance up to 10 GB, plus 0.1 point for each GB between 10 GB and 1000 GB, plus 0.01 point for each GB above 1000 GB. * Unattested addresses get 0.01 point per GB of balance. * 0.1 point is awarded for each GB of balance increase since the previous draw. * 0.2 point is deducted for each GB of balance decrease since the previous draw. The change introduces 0.01 coefficient for unattested addresses and very large attested addresses. As a result, the weight of whales is further reduced. The page http://draw.byteball.org/ now displays whale dominance % at the bottom. |
|
|
|
Good research! Well imo this is cheating, the "real-name attestation" rule should not be abused by 1 person to create over 100X "real-name attestations" to get a significant advantage on the lottery. Someone should really check the validity of his "real-name attestations" which is obviously fraud. Anyway the "real-name attestation" rule is somehow designed to abuse it, should be deactivated as soon as possible and replaced by something else if needed. These attestations are valid. But looks like someone has a huge network of "friends" who are ready to sell their identities for a few bucks. Every distribution method will be abused to some extent. It was abused "to some extent" until it was just about the few bucks of the attestation, but now that it extends to the lottery worth GBs for thousands of $ the abuse is reaching a too high and not any more acceptable extent IMHO. Moreover, to accept this form of abusive behavior would surely encourage others to do the same. Now that it has been exposed, everyone knows exactly how to do that. And many would copy this trick. Do you really want this to happen? After a few draws you would end up with just the abusers taking part to the game. Those addresses are excluded from the draw. Same about a few more addresses with obvious signs of abuse. |
|
|
|
Good research! Well imo this is cheating, the "real-name attestation" rule should not be abused by 1 person to create over 100X "real-name attestations" to get a significant advantage on the lottery. Someone should really check the validity of his "real-name attestations" which is obviously fraud. Anyway the "real-name attestation" rule is somehow designed to abuse it, should be deactivated as soon as possible and replaced by something else if needed. These attestations are valid. But looks like someone has a huge network of "friends" who are ready to sell their identities for a few bucks. Every distribution method will be abused to some extent. |
|
|
|
Correct, the current version signs with the latest address (the one on the Receive tab).
Unless you are concerned about privacy, you can move your entire balance to the already linked address.
@tonych, do we need to link our addresses for every draw, or just once and we enter every week? Link once, they stay linked for all future draws. |
|
|
|
Can anyone enter with multiple addresses ? I can only add one address, the next ones give an error, wants me to confirm/prove the new address with the first address over and over again.
you first have to enter the new address. then the signing will be done with this one. Yeah that's what I do, add new address, enter new address and when I sign, it shows signing X (new) address by Y (old address) and gives an error. So in the message the new address appears but the signer is the old address. Correct, the current version signs with the latest address (the one on the Receive tab). Unless you are concerned about privacy, you can move your entire balance to the already linked address. |
|
|
|
I just added the Airdrop bot to claim piece of the airdrop, aimed at distributing the coins evenly. Here is the result: This is ridiculous. I have 75 Megabytes of Byteball that equals to: 0.0072264237 points. This is not fair distribution, this is feeding the rich  Looks like I'm gonna be murdered for not giving everyone enough points |
|
|
|
How is this improved if the goal is to distribute to as many people as possible? One person a week is as many as possible?
Add those who participate. Even if they don't win, they learn about byteball. Why would anyone who doesn't already know about Byteball participate? Especially when you really only have a chance to win if you pay $10 to give/validate your identity to some relatively unknown Russian-based cryptocurrency (or buy a shitload of byteballs - a relatively unknown Russian-based cryptocurrency that is currently down 99% vs USD or something from ath). If people want to pay $10 to play the lotto there's many easier ways with likely much higher odds of winning than that. Sorry, I mean, I love gambling and lotteries, but this doesn't seem to be aligned with the stated goal of wide distribution. Further, this is essentially heavily tilted towards whales, particularly whales that have been KYC'd, but whales in general. How does having a lottery that is extremely skewed towards people already rich in Byteball further distribution to more people? To get the facts straight, the weight of whales is discounted by 90% if you read the rules, and there is of course no $10 charge for validating your identity. Right, so take address #10 on the richlist for instance: https://byteball.fr/Top100ByteballRichest.phpHe owns 10k GBYTE, meaning he would get 1000x entries into the lottery compared to someone holding 1 GBYTE. This is my 1%. This money does not participate and is immovable until the distribution ends. Also, I thought Jumio or whatever verification cost $10 or so. Is this not correct?
It is $8, which is refunded after successful verification (effectively $0 if you don't screw up), plus $12 is airdropped to a smart contract. If you use a voucher, you don't pay anything (referrer pays). |
|
|
|
How is this improved if the goal is to distribute to as many people as possible? One person a week is as many as possible?
Add those who participate. Even if they don't win, they learn about byteball. I know it is difficult to meet all the wishes community members have. However - although I still own a bunch of GB - I do not welcome distribution for holding Bytes. I would like to see more campaigns and attempts to sign cooperations in order to use Bytes in daily life. I try to use crypto currencies wherever I have to chance to do. It is already possible to pay for a certain type of digital products that I consume with BTC and some other coins. The same should be possible for bytes, and the remaining bytes should be used for those efforts. That's of course the end goal but the path to it might not be as direct as we like. Exactly, the shortest connection between two points is not a straight line but a winding curve full of obstacles.  The shortest connection between Spain and New Zealand is a straight line going though the center of planet Earth. Go ahead take that route. |
|
|
|
How is this improved if the goal is to distribute to as many people as possible? One person a week is as many as possible?
Add those who participate. Even if they don't win, they learn about byteball. I know it is difficult to meet all the wishes community members have. However - although I still own a bunch of GB - I do not welcome distribution for holding Bytes. I would like to see more campaigns and attempts to sign cooperations in order to use Bytes in daily life. I try to use crypto currencies wherever I have to chance to do. It is already possible to pay for a certain type of digital products that I consume with BTC and some other coins. The same should be possible for bytes, and the remaining bytes should be used for those efforts. That's of course the end goal but the path to it might not be as direct as we like. |
|
|
|
How is this improved if the goal is to distribute to as many people as possible? One person a week is as many as possible?
Add those who participate. Even if they don't win, they learn about byteball. Why would anyone who doesn't already know about Byteball participate? Especially when you really only have a chance to win if you pay $10 to give/validate your identity to some relatively unknown Russian-based cryptocurrency (or buy a shitload of byteballs - a relatively unknown Russian-based cryptocurrency that is currently down 99% vs USD or something from ath). If people want to pay $10 to play the lotto there's many easier ways with likely much higher odds of winning than that. Sorry, I mean, I love gambling and lotteries, but this doesn't seem to be aligned with the stated goal of wide distribution. Further, this is essentially heavily tilted towards whales, particularly whales that have been KYC'd, but whales in general. How does having a lottery that is extremely skewed towards people already rich in Byteball further distribution to more people? To get the facts straight, the weight of whales is discounted by 90% if you read the rules, and there is of course no $10 charge for validating your identity. |
|
|
|
How is this improved if the goal is to distribute to as many people as possible? One person a week is as many as possible?
Add those who participate. Even if they don't win, they learn about byteball. |
|
|
|
Weekly draw is a new distribution method that rewards Byte holders https://medium.com/byteball/weekly-draw-for-the-byteball-community-f464ae731c88 For our latest distribution, Byte holders can receive rewards just for holding Bytes. Distributing funds again to existing Byte holders has been a popular request in the community for a while, and we are pleased to bring it back. This time with an improved format! How the weekly airdrop draw worksEvery week, we will airdrop a prize of 200 Gigabytes (GB) and 422.22 Gigablackbytes (GBB — the private currency) to a single winner. It is like a lottery, but you don’t need to buy a ticket, just prove your existing balance. More Bytes, more chances to winYour chances to win depend on the balance of the addresses you link. The larger the balance, the more points you get. The winner of the draw will be selected randomly on a specified date/time in a provably fair way (for the techies, see the algorithm we use to select the winner, it is based on randomness derived from the latest Bitcoin block). Your chance to be selected depends on the points you have on that date/time. The more points you have, the higher is your chance to win. Smaller participants favoredWe have designed the rules to favor of participants with smaller balances, so larger balances don’t result in lots of additional points. This is in keeping with our aim since day 1 to get Bytes and Blackbytes into the hands of as many different people as possible. To get the most points, you’ll need to pass real name attestation and prove your real name (it is a paid service and to pass the attestation after the first attempt, make sure you have good lighting conditions, good focus, and no glare when you scan your document). The draw bot doesn’t see your personal details, it needs just the fact that you are attested. Full rules:* Real-name attested addresses get 1 point per GB of balance up to 10 GB and additionally 0.1 point for each GB above that. * Unattested addresses get 0.1 point per GB of balance. * 0.1 point is awarded for each GB of balance increase since the previous draw. * 0.2 point is deducted for each GB of balance decrease since the previous draw. Refer users to increase your chances of winningIncrease your chances of winning by referring new users. When you refer new users to the draw and one of them wins, you also win 100 GB and 211.11 GBB! You get your referral code and instructions after you link your own address. How long will this distribution last?We plan to run these draws weekly. There is no specified end date but we hope to run the draws for at least 6 months. Needless to say, the weekly draws cannot last forever (only 1 million GB of Bytes and 2.1111 million GBB of Blackbytes will ever exist). This is a new distribution format that to our knowledge has never been tried before and we can’t be sure that we made no mistakes in designing these rules. Based on experience from previous weeks, we’ll adjust the rules of the draw, the amounts paid, points per GB, etc. Ready to play?The first draw is on Friday Dec 14 at 12:00 UTC. Have your addresses linked in advance: add the Draw Airdrop bot from the Bot Store inside your Byteball wallet and follow the instructions. Good luck! See the currently linked addresses (including yours) here http://draw.byteball.org. |
|
|
|
There is no inherent incentive to work together as miners, and if there is, a group of miners has no in-system way to punish miners who do not behave as the group wants them to.
You are right about incentives. But there is something else. PoW mining is an economic activity. You have capex, you have opex, almost all your profits are burned in your huge costs, and you have to care about efficiency in order to stay in the game. And in any economic activity, you have economy of scale. As your mining farm gets bigger, it becomes more efficient and stands better against the competition. You get volume discounts for miners, you will be the first in line for the new generation of miners, you can get cheaper electricity when you buy wholesale, it becomes worthwhile to relocate to a more favorable location, and you can hire the best talent in the industry. It doesn't matter if the PoW algorithm is ASICable or not, the economy of scale is universal. It might be not very important in the growing market when everyone, even a smaller and weaker miner, gets a portion of the growing pie, but nothing lasts forever and as the market matures and gets more competitive, the weaker players are darwinized, and the hash power gets concentrated in the hands of a few bigger miners. Miners, not mining pools. This looks like an end-game of any PoW based blockchain, because it has a heavy "hook" into the economy, and the economy favors scale. You can call it emergent centralization. Incidentally, Byteball moves in the opposite direction. Yes, economy of scale is a thing. But why are you so focussed on talking about Bitcoin? To give you some perspective. To encourage comparison not of protocols, but of their practical realizations, where a degree of centralization often emerges naturally. I mean, as the inventor of Byteball (if that is the appropriate term), I would be much more interested in your views regarding Byteballs inherent problems, not Bitcoins.
Like the DPoS comparison I made in the post. Do you have any thoughts on that, especially with Lisk and EOS as rather gloomy outlooks? I mean, I realize they are not comparable on a 1:1 basis, but there are similarities, don't you think?
Could you be more specific, I don't follow these projects too closely. And it doesn't look like "gloomy" is a generally accepted opinion. Of course there are similarities in what there is a class of users who are chosen for their good behavior but the amount of power over transactions that BB witnesses and DPoS delegates possess is vastly different. ...Incidentally, Byteball moves in the opposite direction. Can you explain what you mean by that? I can't see how this statement is accurate. Byteball started in centralized state and now moving to decentralize. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
